Das Geheimnis von Malampur

Among the three Wyler-Davis' collaborations (the others being "little foxes" and "Jezebel" ) "the letter " is their triumph.The repugnance that most of the French critics feel for the great Wyler is one of their major flaws (coming from "les cahiers du cinema " and the stupidity of the nouvelle vague ravings).

"The letter" is a splendor.A screenplay so simple and so effective it's a wonder it grabs us till the last pictures.A first sequence to rival the best of Hitchcock.A feverish sticky deadly atmosphere from the mysterious garden where a malefic full moon shines on Davis' inscrutable face to the seedy place in the Chinese quarter where they smoke opium and where Gale Sondergaard spins a web :in this memorable scene when she forces Davis to kneel down,she almost surpasses the star,which will seem an impossible task to some,and yet..Every time Sondergaard appears on the screen ,she's absolutely terrifying.I was saying that the screenplay was simple ,but that kind of simplicity takes genius and I wish today's stories had this implacable logic.As always in Wyler's works of that era,the ball sequence is a recurring theme (see the admirable scenes of "Wuthering Heights" and "Jezebel" )Thus,the finale scenes revolve around a ball,beginning with Davis's entrance and ending with a view of the dancers from the outside ,à la "Wuthering Heights" .Excellent performances by the whole cast,fabulous directing,particularly in these last pictures ,where Davis is walking through the garden ,under a bad moon rising..You must see "the letter".

From the opening sequence where we see Bette emptying her gun on this poor unsuspecting soul, you become riveted watching one of Ms. Davis' all-time flawless performances.

In a nutshell, this tells the story of what happens when first we practice to deceive. Bette claims she was attacked by a friend she has seen only casually until she was forced to "defend" herself against his unwanted advances. Initially, it looks like a slam dunk but when the case is taken to trial, more and more, Bette's lies get the best of her.

Not a sympathetic character for the most part. There is one chilling scene where she, totally exasperated with having to remember so many lies, makes a confession to her husband. It is a fascinating scene for while you recoil at her seemingly selfish attitude, there is this underlying, reluctant admiration you feel for this woman's brutal honesty.

Excellent supporting cast all around, most notably, Herbert Marshall as the poor unsuspecting (it appears many men fall under this category when dealing with the Divine Ms. Davis!)husband whose main goal is to support his wife. Now whether she deserves this loyalty is another ugly story.

Excellent mystery with certainly enough twists and turns to keep you totally engrossed in a very good story.

*Just watched it again last night (10/8/2006) - I'm tellin' ya guys - after 900 viewings, the movie still rocks!!!!

With a fine cast, an atmospheric setting, and a tight, tension-packed plot, this is a memorable adaptation of the Somerset Maugham story. Both the story and the film are well-constructed, and indeed both are also aptly titled, in that "The Letter" is what drives the characters and most of the action.

The opening sequence starts out with a languid look at the rubber plantation, immediately establishing the atmosphere, and then suddenly grabs your attention with the shooting. From then on, most of the suspense is psychological, and the scenario is very well-crafted, wringing everything it can out of the setup.

The cast is led by Bette Davis, who gives a vivid performance in the kind of role that she seemed born to play. Herbert Marshall is also excellent as the husband, using little mannerisms and gestures to complement his lines, as he convincingly portrays his earnest, naive character.

The supporting cast has many good moments of their own. James Stephenson's performance is essential to making the movie work so well. His portrayal of the anguished lawyer could not have been surpassed, as he flawlessly shows his outward restraint and inner torment. Victor Sen Yung also performs well - his oily character is perhaps somewhat uncomfortable to watch, but he is essential to the plot, and Yung plays him to good effect. Gale Sondergaard has very few lines, but she establishes an imposing presence all the same.

The British colonial setting, with its clubby atmosphere, its social inequalities, its opportunities, and its contrasting cultures, is done well, and even the tropical heat is believably rendered. Light and darkness are also used well - in addition to the frequent shots of the moon, the slats on so many of the windows not only make for attractive scenery, but at times they are also used creatively, as they let just a little bit of light shine on characters who themselves might not want too much light to come into their lives.

Everything adds up to a memorable melodrama with many strong features, well worth seeing both for the cast and for the story.

In `The Letter' William Wyler takes a predictable plot and turns it into a brilliant film with the help of one of the grande dames of film. For hell hath no fury like Bette Davis with a revolver in her hand.

The film opens with Leslie Crosby (Bette Davis) emptying her revolver into a man on her front porch, shooting him twice after he hits the ground. She tells the police she was defending herself against his sexual assault. She seems to be headed for an easy acquittal until (surprise) an incriminating letter surfaces that suggests that she summoned the victim to her house with the clear intention of murdering him.

Can the evidence be suppressed? Will she be acquitted? Was she really in love with the victim? The answers to these questions are obvious to all but the most naïve viewer. Yet, despite the transparency of the plot, this film works for two reasons: Bette Davis and William Wyler.

Bette Davis is arguably among the best actresses of all time. She was originally signed by Universal Studios, who dropped her because she didn't have the looks to be a movie star. Still, Warner Brothers decided to take a chance on her in 1932, signing her to a seven-year contract that would produce two Oscars. She was nominated for best actress eleven times, winning twice (`Dangerous', 1936 and `Jezebel' 1939). She was nominated five straight years from 1939 to 1943. This performance was in the middle of that run. It is classic Bette Davis, utterly in command of every scene. Her portrayal of Leslie is superb, a duplicitous and cunning woman who could manipulate any man to do her bidding. It took another woman to humble her. This is Davis in her prime and it is awesome to see her at work. She could make a dog food commercial exciting to watch.

What Davis was to acting William Wyler was to directing. (The two shared more than a professional relationship, and it was widely rumored at that time that they were romantically involved.) Wyler was nominated for best director twelve times winning three (`Mrs. Miniver', 1942; `The Best Years of Our Lives', 1943; `Ben Hur', 1960). Like Davis, he was also nominated for this film. Wyler's camerawork here is fantastic. In black and white films, lighting is critical, because the director doesn't have the luxury of relying on color to dramatize the images. Aided by veteran cinematographer Tony Gaudio, Wyler's use of lighting and shadows in this film is brilliant. It could serve as a primer for dramatic black and white cinematography. Gaudio was also nominated for an Oscar for this film, one of his six nominations in a forty-year career.

This film was nominated for seven Academy Awards, including best picture, but it was shut out. Despite a predictable story, I rated it a 9/10 on the strength of the acting, directing and cinematography. It is an excellent opportunity to see Bette Davis during her glory years in one of her many outstanding performances.

From its explosive beginning to its hushed ending, this is Golden Age Hollywood story-telling at its best. Director William Wyler and star Bette Davis were lovers behind the scenes and it shows here in the masterful way he showcases her and also in the way she responds.

The story, set in colonial Malaysia, from W Somerset Maugham's novel, is expertly unveiled from that dramatic opening as, under a full moon, Davis's Leslie Crosbie commits the ultimate crime of passion and then throws herself on the legal skills of family friend James Stephenson to get her off. Her defence is self-defence against attempted rape and seems plausible until word is filtered to Stephenson by his duplicitous, self-serving native assistant of the existence of a highly incriminating letter written by the accused woman on the night of the murder, which puts a completely different reading on events.

And so the threat of blackmail leads to a secret bargain with the slain man's widow, played in inscrutable, indeed mute fashion by Gale Sondergaard, an imposing, haunting presence in her every scene, unwillingly dragging Stephenson into a shady bargain which compromises his professional ethics, but out of friendship for Davis's doting, unsuspecting husband, Herbert Marshall, he eventually allows himself to be drawn into effectively acting as Davis's accomplice.

Although the trial outcome is assured, there's still a price to be paid by Bette however when Marshall learns that the financial price for buying the letter was far higher than its importance had been made out to him before, leaving him penniless and unable to fulfil his dream move to Singapore. Aah, but at least he has the love of his innocent wife to fall back on...or so he thinks...

The only inconsistencies in the story for me were the two prices Davis had to pay in the end, which I can only attribute to the Code's requirement that no crime, certainly a capital crime like this, can be allowed to go unpunished. That said it does pave the way for Davis's memorable final walk in shadow to her ultimate fate which impressively closes the film.

There can't be many better-lit films than this, Wyler's use of light and shade is absolutely masterful. He also gets a great lead performance from Davis, who holds onto her steely, ice-cool demeanour right up until Marshall, also very good in his very supportive role, asks her the question which causes her facade to shatter. James Stephenson, a name previously unknown to me and who sadly died just after the film's release, is likewise excellent as the couple's conflicted legal adviser and was deservedly Oscar-nominated for his work. Mention should also be made of Max Steiner's brooding soundtrack which adds much to the stifling atmosphere throughout.

This film is a rare combination of a rattling good tale, expertly directed and convincingly played all adding up to a tense and gripping melodrama.